Talk:Sydney train doors stuck, passengers delayed

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Original Reporting notes[edit]

All events at the station were witnessed by me. - Borofkin 00:34, 9 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've contacted CityRail to ask for an explanation, they're going to "get back to me". - Borofkin 00:38, 9 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]


please explain where sydney is. at least link it to wikipedia...

There is now a link for Sydney. StuRat 00:56, 10 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Being British, I fail to see the newsworthiness of this story. ;-) 09:20, 9 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Exactly the same thing happened to me yesterday (Stafford, UK) although the guard didn't laugh. I got to work three hours late... ClareWhite 11:34, 9 September 2005 (UTC) PS I don't want to knock the British rail system though, it is normally very reliable and great.Reply[reply]

Sydneysiders would hardly find this news either ;) Dysprosia 12:43, 9 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think it's news. You won't believe what stories my local newspaper covers. This one, if it had happened in my city, would stand good chances of making it to the first page of the local section. And after all, we do want to encourage localism here at WN --Deprifry 15:06, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, I agree, it's a great story and not least because it raises an eyebrow amongst us Brits! ClareWhite 15:15, 9 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's certainly news when placed within the context of CityRail's recent problems. As a story on its own, it's more the sort of thing that a tabloid would print and sensationalise wildly, especially the part about the guard laughing, because it would catch peoples attention. I just wish I had my camera with me to catch the look on peoples faces when the train pulled out of the station. - Borofkin 00:39, 10 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does Wikinews support a kind of 'ongoing investigation' type of story? This is a good example; CityRail in Sydney is lurching from one controversy to the next, as a result of long-term underfunding, and in Sydney this is a big, ongoing story. People can't get to work, so it matters to them. There should be some kind of way to build a background story with some longevity, and/or a thread of stories on an issue. Viveka 23:56, 15 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories are your friend? Cf. Category:Telstra sale Dysprosia 01:32, 16 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]


You forgot to submit this article, and would have been out of the contest, so I entered it on your behalf. I think the event itself is local news, but not a guard laughing, so I changed the title. I like the logo and original reporting. You didn't mention if any passengers were stuck on the train when the doors were stuck, this should be clarified. You should also update the article either with the official's repsonse or say "they did not provide the statement they had promised". Also, you should say whether this is a fully automated system suffering a technical failure, or has a conductor who is supposed to open the doors by pressing a button or pulling a lever. If the conductor was "asleep at the wheel", that would have potentially serious safety implications. StuRat 20:05, 9 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for lookin' out for me. I won't survive the weekend in the contest anyway. Regarding the article, there has still been no explanation as to why the doors didn't open, and it certainly isn't correct, at this early stage of the Wikinews investigation, to say that they were "stuck". There are many explanations - for example, the guard could hate people from Harris Park, and just wanted to piss them off. The guard, by the way, is the guy who presses the button that opens and closes the doors. As for whether people on the train were unable to get off, I wouldn't know. All the information I have is in the article. - Borofkin 00:44, 10 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, that was an assumption on my part, but I think it's reasonable to assume the least confrontational explanation until evidence shows it is something worse. For example, if I can't find my car keys, it's a lot safer to look for them down in the couch cushions than to assume my neighbor broke in and stole them, LOL. StuRat 00:58, 10 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why assume anything? All witnesses would agree that the doors didn't open, but there would be a significant number who didn't agree that the doors were "stuck". It's safer to just state that the doors didn't open. - Borofkin 23:57, 11 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree, the story should be called "Sydney train doors fail to open, passengers delayed", or something. There is no evidence that they were stuck, or that they weren't, so just say what we do know - they didn't open, although they should have.Viveka 23:56, 15 September 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]